Regular vs Explosive Cannon Shot

[mayhemtoledo]

Hello. I've always been wondering what's best to use, regular or explosive cannon shot. For the old catapult and trebuchet eras, i could really see the advantage/disadvantage of each (fun to see the burning rock hit the enemy army, well, if they hit at all) but cannons come way too late in the game for me to use them that often to see the effect of each mode.

Anyway, i'd like to hear your opinions about this. ^_^

[Space Wolves]

If i remember correctly, regular shot is just a single shot cannon ball, that will knock down a few troops and bounce.

explosive, is like a shell that explodes into multiple fragments, that inflicts maximum number of casualties, just like a grenade.

[kelvintyk]

If i remember correctly, regular shot is just a single shot cannon ball, that will knock down a few troops and bounce.

explosive, is like a shell that explodes into multiple fragments, that inflicts maximum number of casualties, just like a grenade.

Explosive shots aren't that effective. Its blast radius is small.

[fcmisc]

Aren't explosive shells less accurate?

[Janezki]

I think so too :hmmm:

Edit: 300 POST!!!! "Freeman"

[Primvs Sextvs Loverlord]

Ugh .. Artillery in M2 is not worth it at all unless you're besieging a city. Period.

[kelvintyk]

Ugh .. Artillery in M2 is not worth it at all unless you're besieging a city. Period.

Yea, in open field battles, artillery is way too slow and hard to hit home. So i don't bring artillery either.

[gogis]

Ugh .. Artillery in M2 is not worth it at all unless you're besieging a city. Period.

I strongly disagree here. When you engage army, that not going to attack you (you have stronger army), 4 stacks of various artillery/trebuchets/whatever able to wipe up to 30% percent of enemy army.

In mid/late game period all my all-around-good attack invading armies have 4 stacks of artillery for simple purpose - not losing that much troops (which is silver/gold chevrones already)

Also i siege citadels with direct destroying walls up to final square, avoiding all gates and destroing every single tower in close proximity, because i hate to lose troops on all way. I need many artillery for that task!

So in short. It's useful everywhere. No need to casualties if you can handle things with artillery without single lost soldier

[whoreable]

In the unpatched version, I was able to defeat whole armys with Bombards and Culverins, that is because they would not attack from far away.

[Slime]

If you're using cannons against a full army, regular shots tend to cause more casualties as they usually destroy a full line of soldiers. Explosive shots have such a small radius that they will usually kill just a handful of troops.

[billerator]

Sorry to disagree with you Sextus but I've used a couple of cannons in internet battles (in the open field) and they worked absolutely brilliantly. If you have a stand offish/playing defensively opponent your choice of a couple of cannon type weapons will pay dividends. If your opponent doesn't bring the fight to you, you can fire dozens/scores of balls or shells before moving in to engage. Doing this is likely to result in claiming up to or even well over 100 enemy men!

[NiccoloMachiavelli]

The best anti-infantry artillery I've used is the mortar. Great for offensive and defensive sieging. You can drop a shell right onto the top of a wall to hit the defenders and its can be oddly accurate.

I've found explosive shells to be next to useless. The accuracy drops to nothing and even when it does it it doesnt seem to take out more than 1 or 2 men. Better to leave the cannon as normal so it acts as a bowling ball.

[Roshak]

Explosive is the most commonly used against armies while Regular is used for sieges due to its better accuracy.

[Kalos]

Serpentines are the most amazing anti-personnel artillery weapons I have ever seen. Each cannonball that hits sends an entire line of soldiers flying up into the air. Great for tightly packed formations.

[Black Francis]

I would also chime in with explosive shot being useless. The inaccuracy isn't a problem as it is intended for short ranges, but it is just pathetic in terms of blast radius.

[Zodiac]

I would also chime in with explosive shot being useless. The inaccuracy isn't a problem as it is intended for short ranges, but it is just pathetic in terms of blast radius.

I KNow what you I once blasted the center of a DFK Unit. 5 Guys down and 15 blasted into the air only to get up. One thing I have noticed is the Impact on morale afterwords.

This might not be completely relevent, but it seems to work better on Calvary since they can't get up once their down. Though you have to be Lucky enough to hit them in the first place.

[crazyj]

I like both very much.

[spetsnaz24]

in open battles, catapults tend to inflict most casualties. gunpowder artillery (except for mortars) becomes useless when your infantry is fighting in melee.

[jimjimjim]

I have thought that cannons seem a lot more accurate when targeting the walls/towers for some reason.
Not sure why, but they can seem to hit a tower miles away - yet give them 1,000 closely packed troops - stationary and they miss more often than not.
strange

[kelvintyk]

They are not meant for shooting at troops.